Firefox 社群討論區

Followed unstall and trying to remove remaining folders, data from computer.

I cannot del these folders, etc despite being admin mode or from command line.

whats next.

I want to do a fresh install of Firefox but wont install firefox again if I have to an computer reimage.

I have always downloaded and used the beta version of Firefox on both my Windows 11 and Android environments. Recently I've noticed I'm no longer using the beta version on Windows 11, but am so far unable to find a download for it, either from the Windows Store or Mozilla itself. Can anyone tell me if it's still possible for members of the public to install Firefox beta on Windows 11 platforms, if so how, and if not, why not?

Hello Firefox team,

I downloaded firefox-142.0.tar.xz and copied the necessary files to the appropriate directories. Unfortunately, I am missing the 24x24 and 256x256 icons. Could you please add these resources?

I would be very grateful if you could help me with this.

Best regards Chris

hi,

  I have an old PC with this CPU:

Architecture: i686

 CPU op-mode(s):         32-bit
 Address sizes:          34 bits physical, 32 bits virtual
 Byte Order:             Little Endian

CPU(s): 1

 On-line CPU(s) list:    0

Vendor ID: AuthenticAMD

 BIOS Vendor ID:         AMD                                             
 Model name:             AMD Sempron(tm) 2400+
   BIOS Model name:      AMD Sempron(tm) 2400+                             CPU @ 1.6GHz
   BIOS CPU family:      29
   CPU family:           6
   Model:                8
   Thread(s) per core:   1
   Core(s) per socket:   1
   Socket(s):            1
   Stepping:             1
   BogoMIPS:             3333.66
   Flags:                fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat p
                         se36 mmx fxsr sse syscall mp mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow cpuid 3dnowprefe
                         tch vmmcall

Caches (sum of all):

 L1d:                    64 KiB (1 instance)
 L1i:                    64 KiB (1 instance)
 L2:                     256 KiB (1 instance)

Vulnerabilities:

 Gather data sampling:   Not affected
 Itlb multihit:          Not affected
 L1tf:                   Not affected
 Mds:                    Not affected
 Meltdown:               Not affected
 Mmio stale data:        Not affected
 Reg file data sampling: Not affected
 Retbleed:               Not affected
 Spec rstack overflow:   Not affected
 Spec store bypass:      Vulnerable
 Spectre v1:             Mitigation; usercopy/swapgs barriers and __user pointer sanitizatio
                         n
 Spectre v2:             Mitigation; Retpolines; STIBP disabled; RSB filling; PBRSB-eIBRS No
                         t affected; BHI Not affected
 Srbds:                  Not affected
 Tsx async abort:        Not affected

in some linux (arch 32 bit) I have problem executing firefox, Is there a version for CPU without request from SSE3 Flag?

thanks

I've noticed that I've got both the 32 bit (../Program Files (86)/..) and 64 bit versions (../Program Files/..) of Firefox installed on my pc. I didn't install both and both appear to be the current version. Is this normal behaviour? Only one instance appears in add/remove programs, but if I go to default apps, Firefox appears twice (presumably the 32 & 64 bit versions). If this is not normal, does anyone have a suggestion as to how to remove the 32 bit version without damaging the 64 bit one?

I have downoloaed Firefox offline installer (a .xz file) from here:

https://download-installer.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases/139.0b9/linux-x86_64/en-GB/

I have also downloaded a .asc file, presumably a pgp signature.

Now both files are saved locally in my computer.

Assuming Linux latest release, how do I verify the contents of the offline installer file (.xz) from the Linux Terminal? I have install gpg tools. And commands like ```gpg``` are available.

What I did so far:

 gpg --show-keys --with-fingerprint firefox-139.0b9.tar.xz.asc

with this output:

 gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found.

Do you really want us to verify the contents of the installers you provide? A sha256 sum would be great, though not as secure, for when the GPG predictably fails for the ordinary user due to its huge and useless complexity and bureaucracy.